Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

most of the comments following the review are pretty negative too. not much love for stid in that paper's readership.

For what it's worth, I did a quick count of Collin's 3/5 movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Only 15 of about 175 3 star reviews were rotten. So about 93 percent of his 3/5 reviews were noted as "fresh."

Meh. Who cares? Any review that ends wondering where the "no man has gone before," spirit of Trek has gone doesn't get it, anyway. That damn monolog has become a curse.

__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain

Together they have come up with a very clever sleight-of-hand: all of the narrative cracks are papered over with references to old Star Trek characters and episodes. 'Hang on a minute,' you find yourself thinking, 'that doesn’t make sen ... oh look, a Tribble.' The malevolent genius of this is best appreciated in a cinema filled with confirmed Star Trek fans, who will dutifully whoop and applaud a familiar alien while the film quietly pulls off another dubious plot manoeuvre under their noses.

narrative cracks and dubious plot manouevres, in a film written by O., K. & L.? IMPOSSIBLE!

__________________
A movie aiming low should not be praised for hitting that target.

Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not.

It's not about what is or isn't fictional. The problem is that I often see Trek fans treat it as if it's this law or ideal that Trek created and that it's some epitome of wisdom that should be followed just because it's espoused by the show, when in actuality the show has very little to say about it. It was just something tacked on as a merchandising tactic, not some grand idea that embodies what Star Trek is.

Instead, fans twist it to suit their own specific cases to make it say things like, "Everybody should appreciate that there are going to be different incarnations of Star Trek." If that's what fans are twisting IDIC to mean, that's bullshit. People are free to love Star Trek, hate it, or a mixture of both, and just because some half-baked toy marketing scheme says one thing, fans aren't beholden to that philosophy like it's some sort of dogma.

Go and look at the post I quoted and the usage of IDIC. "Practice IDIC." Practice? Really? I think you might want to reconsider before you start throwing terms around like idiotic or ignorant.

Uhh, your ignorance is showing. "IDIC" may be fictional, but the idea behind it is not.

It's not about what is or isn't fictional. The problem is that I often see Trek fans treat it as if it's this law or ideal that Trek created and that it's some epitome of wisdom that should be followed just because it's espoused by the show, when in actuality the show has very little to say about it. It was just something tacked on as a merchandising tactic, not some grand idea that embodies what Star Trek is.

Instead, fans twist it to suit their own specific cases to make it say things like, "Everybody should appreciate that there are going to be different incarnations of Star Trek." If that's what fans are twisting IDIC to mean, that's bullshit. People are free to love Star Trek, hate it, or a mixture of both, and just because some half-baked toy marketing scheme says one thing, fans aren't beholden to that philosophy like it's some sort of dogma.

Go and look at the post I quoted and the usage of IDIC. "Practice IDIC." Practice? Really? I think you might want to reconsider before you start throwing terms around like idiotic or ignorant.

I understand what you're saying but IMO it's a solid ideal to reach for. I really can't find fault with people who want to inculcate it into their lives.

And I called you ignorant because your post reeked of it. IDIC the term may be fictional but the idea behind it is not.

I understand what you're saying but IMO it's a solid ideal to reach for. I really can't find fault with people who want to inculcate it into their lives.

The problem is that people are incorporating something twisted and strange and not at all what you think it is. I've seen one other poster play the IDIC card, but basically when it pertains to when people disagree with what he likes, and then he turns around and speaks of what he dislikes. That really makes no sense to me. It would make more sense to me that instead of worshiping a TV show's dogma and using it as any kind of basis for philosophy that one should first start with the basics like not being a hypocrite. Any one who throws out any claims of IDIC is like the one who throws the first stone...

And I called you ignorant because your post reeked of it.

Perhaps you already had the scent on your nose. There was nothing ignorant about it.